From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | TODO Items |
Date: | 2004-08-03 05:06:40 |
Message-ID: | 874qnkolnj.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> TODO item?
On that note several prior conversations I had here ended with WIBNI
conclusions that really ought to be TODO items, in my humble opinion. Two come
to mind off the top of my head resulting in:
. "SELECT * FROM x JOIN y USING (b) WHERE a=?" could use an index on y(a,b)
since for a constant value of "a" the index traversal would be effectively
equivalent just be "b". This could result in an efficient merge join
avoiding an unnecessary sort.
. The semantics for row-value expressions is wrong. (a,b) < (x,y) should be
true if a<x or if a=x and b<y. Currently it expands to a<x and b<y.
. Fix row-value expression handling to not depend on the operator names and
instead use btree access method strategy values instead, allowing row-value
expressions on other operators with <,=,> behaviour (ie btree indexable
behaviour).
. Allow multi-column indexes to be used to optimize row-value expressions. Ie,
allow a btree index on a,b to be used to execute an expression like (a,b) <
(x,y).
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-08-03 05:20:18 | Have you heard? It's 8.0 ... |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2004-08-03 04:37:09 | Re: pg_dump bug fixing |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zhenbang Wei | 2004-08-03 05:46:06 | postgres-zh_TW.po for 7.5 |
Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2004-08-03 04:07:01 | Re: autovauum integration patch: Attempt #4 |